Difference between revisions of "Resource:72bdb655-6fad-466a-a73e-148ee8a90a1d"
From The Embassy of Good Science
(Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Cases |Title=Scandalous behaviour at Medical University of Innsbruck |Is About=This editorial reports on a research scandal in Austria that involved...") |
|||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
|Has Timepoint=2008 | |Has Timepoint=2008 | ||
|Has Location=Austria; Medical University of Innsbruck | |Has Location=Austria; Medical University of Innsbruck | ||
| − | |Has Virtue And Value=Honesty; Accountability; | + | |Has Virtue And Value=Honesty; Accountability; Respect |
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Informed consent; Deception; Clinical trials | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Informed consent; Deception; Clinical trials | ||
|Related To Research Area=LS 03.12 - Stem cell biology | |Related To Research Area=LS 03.12 - Stem cell biology | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:50, 6 April 2021
ResourcesCases
Scandalous behaviour at Medical University of Innsbruck
What is this about?
This editorial reports on a research scandal in Austria that involved a famous scientist and high-ranked academic officials. The case is about a trial involving patients who paid for the stem-cell treatment for urinary incontinence without knowing that the treatment was experimental.
Why is this important?
This editorial highlights that the lack of an official national body responsible for addressing issues of scientific misconduct contributes to an inefficient and disorganised workflow in dealing with cases of misconduct.
For whom is this important?
What are the best practices?
Authors highlight the role that organisations such as the US Office of Research Integrity or the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty can play in streamlining the process of dealing with cases of misconduct.
